Gedurende die afgelope week, my kollega and I were doing some work for a client in NYC. We were testing a different aspects of a MOSS implementation using their "standard" werkstasie bou (in teenstelling met ons skootrekenaars). While doing that, Ons het in 'n paar foute deur die volgende stappe:

• Oop te maak 'n MS Word dokument via Windows Explorer (wat gebruik maak van WebDAV).
• Maak 'n verandering.
• Stoor dit.

Ons het gekom om te besef dat 'n paar keer (gewoonlik die eerste keer) ons gered van die dokument, the save didn’t "stick." Save did not save. We would pull that document back up and our changes simply were not there.

Ons verstaan ​​nie die wortel probleem op hierdie punt, but we figured that we should make sure that the latest MS Office service pack had been installed on that work station. The IT folks went and did that. We went through the test again and we discovered a new problem. When we saved it, Ons het nou het hierdie fout:

Hierdie keer, dit lyk soos elke verandering was, in werklikheid, gered, whether we answered Yes or No to the scripts question.

Ons het uiteindelik 'n blik op die werklike weergawe van Office en dit blyk dat die werkplek MS Office hardloop 2000 met Service Pack 3 wat verskyn in die Hulp -> About as "Office 2002".

Die moraal van die storie: Ek sal altyd Kantoor 2003 as my minimum basislyn kantoor weergawe wanneer die gebruik van WebDAV en mos.

</einde>

Skryf in op my blog.

(Vir die soektog doeleindes, dit is die fout se teks):

Line: 11807

Char: 2

Fout: Voorwerp ondersteun nie hierdie eiendom of metode

Kode; 0

URL: http://sharepoint01/DocumentReview/_vti_bin/owssvr.dll?location=Documents/1210/testworddocument.doc&dialogview=SaveForm

Wil jy om voort te gaan uitvoer van scripts op hierdie bladsy?

In one or my very first blog posts, Ek beskryf die algehele proses wat ons volg op 'n kliënt van SPS te migreer 2003 to MOSS. A reader left a comment asking for more detail and here it is.

Vir dat migrasie projek, Ons het 'n goeie manier om 'n klomp van SPS te beweeg om uit te vind 2003 documents over to MOSS. The initial load was easy enough. Create a new target document library in MOSS and use windows explorer to move the documents.

This is the new document library:

Open up two windows explorers. Point the first at SPS 2003 and the second at the new document library in MOSS. The following screen shot shows this. Note that the top browser is actually pointing at my c:\temp drive, but you can imagine it pointing to an SPS 2003 document library:

After that drag and drop operation, my target looks like this:

Now it’s time to deal with the metadata. Assume we have just one column of metadata for these documents named "location." We can see from the above "all documents" view that the location is blank. It’s easy enough to use a data sheet view to enter the location, or even go into each document’s properties one by one to add a location. Let’s assume that there is no practical way to assign the location column a value automatically and that end users must do this by hand. Verder, let’s assume there are hundreds of documents (maybe thousands) and that it will take many many days to update the metadata. As we all know, no one is going to sit down and work for four of five days straight updating meta data for documents. In plaas daarvan, they will break that out over a period of weeks or possibly longer. To facilitate this process, we can create an "untagged data" view as shown:

Nou, when someone sits down to spend their allocated daily hour or two to tag migrated documents, they can use the "untagged documents" view to focus their effort:

As users tag documents, they drop off this list.

This notion of an untagged data view can also help with a class of data validation problem people inquire about on the forums. Uit die boks, there’s no way to prevent a user from uploading a document to MOSS and then not enter meta data. We can specify that a particular site column is mandatory and the user won’t be allowed to push the save button. Egter, if the user uploads and then closes the browser (or uses windows explorer to upload the document), we can’t force the user to enter meta data (weer, uit die boks).

This approach can be used to help with that situation. We can use a "poorly tagged data" view to easily identify these documents and correct them. Couple this with a KPI and you have good visibility to the data with drill-down to manage these exceptional circumstances.

</einde>

Skryf in op my blog.

Hierdie week, I’ve struggled a bit with my team to get MOSS installed in a simple two-server farm. Having gone through it, Ek het 'n groter waardering vir die aard van die probleme wat mense verslag te doen oor die MSDN forums en elders.

Die finale plaas opset:

• SQL / Index / Intranet WFE die binnekant van die firewall.
• WFE in die DMZ.
• 'N soort van firewall tussen die DMZ en die interne bediener.

Voordat ons begin met die projek, we let the client know which ports needed to be open. During the give and take, heen en weer oor daardie, ons nooit uitdruklik gesê twee belangrike dinge:

1. SSL beteken dat jy nodig het om 'n sertifikaat.
2. The DMZ server must be part of a domain.

Dag een, we showed up to install MOSS and learned that the domain accounts for database and MOSS hadn’t been created. To move things along, we went ahead and installed everything with a local account on the intranet server.

Op hierdie punt, ons ontdek die verwarring oor die SSL sertifikaat en, ongelukkig, decided to have our infrastructure guy come back later that week to continue installing the DMZ server. In die gemiddelde tyd, Ons oplossing argitekte vorentoe beweeg met die besigheid goed.

'N naweek gaan verby en die kliënt verkry die sertifikaat.

Ons infrastruktuur man opdaag en ontdek dat die DMZ bediener is nie gekoppel aan enige domein (óf 'n omtrek domein met 'n beperkte trust of die intranet domein). We wasted nearly a 1/2 dag wat. If we hadn’t let the missing SSL certificate bog us down, we would have discovered this earlier. Oh well….

Nog 'n dag verby en die verskeie sekuriteit komitees, belanghebbende partye en (nie so) onskuldige omstanders almal eens dat dit OK is die DMZ bediener met die intranet domein aan te sluit (dit is 'n POC, na al, nie 'n produksie-oplossing).

Infrastructure guy comes in to wrap things up. This time we successfully pass through the the modern-day gauntlet affectionately known as the "SharePoint Configuration Wizard." We have a peek in central administration and … Yee Haw! … DMZ server is listed in the farm. We look a little closer and realize we broke open the Champaign a mite bit early. WSS services is stuck in a "starting" status.

Lang storie kort, it turns out that we forgot to change the identity of the service account via central administration from the original local account to the new domain account. We did that, re-hardloop die opset towenaar en voila! We were in business.

</einde>

Skryf in op my blog.

Hoewel dit nie letterlik waar, as 'n praktiese saak, 'n internet-gesig staar web voor die einde in 'n DMZ moet wees in 'n domein (d.w.z. nie 'n selfstandige bediener in sy eie klein werkgroep). It doesn’t need to be in the same domain as the internal WFE(s) en ander bedieners (en waarskynlik nie), maar dit moet 'n domein.

My colleagues and I spent an inordinate amount of time on a proposal which included SharePoint pre-requisites. This included a comprehensive list of firewall configurations that would enable the DMZ server to join the farm and so forth. Ongelukkig, Ons kon nie 'n sin iewers wat gesê het om by te voeg, tot die effek, "the whole bloody point of this configuration is to allow your DMZ WFE server, in 'n domein, die interne plaas aan te sluit."

'N perfekte storm van gebeure, waar ons basies gelyk het toe ons dalk reg gekyk, saamgesweer het om hierdie probleem te verberg ons tot redelik laat in die proses, wat sal verhoed dat my uit te roep my "vertel slegte nuus vroeë" regeer.

Sug.

Skryf in op my blog.